Following Azure DevOps documentation, I have deleted a number of projects. The project is removed from the online view but strange folders now appear in VS 2017 source control explorer. These folders contain source code from the deleted projects.
I tried to delete and resync my workspace but the unwanted folders synced again. Can anyone who has seen this behavior advise how i can get rid of them?
br Nico
Edit:
It seems like this is not a new issue. I am able to reproduce this with TFVC projects only. Take a look at this post about how to remove "deleted" team projects. Hopefully that gets you moving in the right direction.
If all else fails... use Git :)
Original:
It seems to me like VS is holding onto some information about the remote and which projects it expects to be there.
You may simply need to refresh the connection in VS.
If the refresh still shows the deleted projects, try removing the server connection completely, and adding it fresh.
Related
I was trying to migrate/upgrade a solution(Database project) from VSS to Git.
After a few operations(like disconnect the source control, upgrade project file, etc), I found out the most of the options in team explorer are gone.
Now there is only Settings left but there suppose to have Changes, Braches, Sync. Like
And the worst is, I thought it's because I messed up something in the solution(local repository) but I found out that all repositories now behave the same when I open them by Visual studio.
What should I do to fix this situation?
It seems perhaps one of my operations disconnect me from Git instead of VSS cause those options resume after I reconnect to TFS Git proactively.
I ran into the same problem again. It seems VSS2Git somehow dis-attached the repo from Team Explorer so you can see it shows Offline caption right after Home.
Solution
1. In Team Explorer, switch to connect tab.
2. Under local git repositories clicks Add and select the repo you want.
3. Double click the repo you picked in the previous step to attach it.
4. Now you should be able to have correct home page with repo you are targeting.
After steps above, if you lost entries in Solution Explorer, means the VSS didn't unbind fully by VSS. Try the following
File > Source Control > Change Source Control
Unbind project which still sticks with VSS
We are using Build Pipeline in Azure DevOps to create a Deployment Artifact. Typical steps in such pipeline are:
Build Solution / Project
Copy dlls output into $Build.ArtifactStagingDirectory
Publish Artifact from $Build.ArtifactStagingDirectory
I just wonder if I can rely on the fact, that on start of each Build the Build.ArtifactStagingDirectory is empty. Or should I clean the folder as first step to be sure?
From my experience the folder was always empty, but I am not sure if I can rely on that. Is that something specific to Azure hosted Agent and maybe by using custom Build agents I have to do manual clean-ups of this folder? Maybe some old files from last build could remain there? I did not found this info in documentation.
Thanks.
I think that the main idea of this variable $Build.ArtifactStagingDirectory is to be a clean area so you can manage the code you're pushing from your repo. As far as I know, there is no explicit information on documentation talking that this folder is empty at every new build, but there are a few "clues":
You can see at the Microsoft's Build Variables documentation that Build.StagingDirectory is always purged before each new build, so you have a fresh start every build.
In the documentation above you have a few cases where it explicitly cites that some folders or files are not cleaned on a new build, like the Build.BinariesDirectory variable.
I've run a few build and realeases pointing to my Web App on Azure, and I never saw an unwanted file or folder that was not related to my build pipeline.
I hope that helps.
I have the following problem: I have a Laptop with two different user accounts (UserA & UserB / they belong to the same person but have different priveleges).
UserA: can build the solution and run tests locally (Everything is working as expected)
UserB: Has the rights to publish to the specific network drive, however he cannot build the project. The reason is that the Windows user itself has not the correct proxy settings configured, and thats why the nuget packages cannot be downloaded.
I have no possibility to change the proxy settings for UserB right now (It depends on internal processes, which might take a while)
However I would have expected, that when I build the solution with UserA, UserB would not need to build it again and just can publish it. This, does not work, as soon as I want to publish, VS tries to rebuild the solution and this does not work because some dependencies are missing and cannot be loaded.
Is there any solution for this problem? I tried to make a research, however I was not really sure for the correct keywords to search for.
Edit: I have now the domain added to my UserB, but I still have some other problems. However I found out that this article is heavily related to my issue: Unable to launch Visual Studio 2015 as a different user.
When I start Visual Studio via Command Line with the mentioned arguments, more works, however I am now not able any longer to connect to my database using Integrated Security = true in the connection string. But at least I can build now. Deploying also works but I just get a 500 Server error when I try to connect to the resource.
Edit2: I needed to add the domain to my user when opening Visual Studio with the command mentioned in the link above. This fixed my problem with connecting to the database.
Actually I do not need an answer anymore for my initial question but I will not delete it because maybe someone has an answer for a person who will have the same question later on.
I guess the title says it all.
I noticed some ads were popping up on a client's site we are currently developing. It only shows on this particular site. Not any other site. It is very annoying to put it mildly.
I thought removing it would be as easy as setting up a new environment on ElasticBeanstalk for it. I was wrong!
I have started a fresh instance for the application, scanned the project folder for malware before deploying, emptied the content of s3 bucket for static files. All these made no difference. The adware/malware is still there.
It has been driving me nuts for the past few days. Does anyone know how to resolve this kind of problem?
Mark B pointed me in the right direction.
I used inspect element to check the network processes of pages showing the Malware/Adware. It was after this i noticed a few asynchronous posts going to http://api.adsrun.net/post. Of course, i'm not making any post calls to this link. So i decided to inspect my JavaScript files as seen in View Page Source. Fortunately, it was in the last few lines of the second file i inspected. Immediately i deleted this file, normalcy returned to my web application.
It has been a very frustrating several hours. Thanks once again, Mark B for your suggestion.
The general guidance appears to be to install Sitecore into one folder, e.g. D:\Websites\MyWebSite and then create your Visual Studio project in a separate folder, e.g. C:\Projects\MyWebProject. You would then publish your custom code into the Sitecore folder from Visual Studio (This video explains what I’m describing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3Mwcphtz4w around 13 mins in).
I have the following questions:-
Do people only store their Visual Studio project in source countrol and not the Sitecore code?
The publish option from VS into the Sitecore folder only has options for adding files or deleting anything not in the VS project. How would files removed from the VS project ever get deleted without doing it manually?
We use web-deploy to publish sites to staging and live environments. In this scenario would you publish from your VS project or would you set up a way to publish the Sitecore folder (if so how)?
Is this actually a good set up to have or do you do something different?
I did a lot of research on this when we started Sitecore development a couple of years ago. I remember reading a post from Sean Kearney that made a lot of sense to me: http://seankearney.com/post/Visual-Studio-Projects-and-Sitecore
We ended up using this approach for both large and small scale projects and it has been great. You will also want to look at a couple of other tools:
Team Development for Sitecore (TDS) from Hedgehog Development (http://www.hhogdev.com/products/team-development-for-sitecore/overview.aspx)
CopySauce from Igloo (http://www.igloo.com.au/blog/copysauce-igloos-sitecore-development-utility/)
SitecoreRocks for Visual Studio
So to answer your questions:
All of your code and some of the Sitecore items are stored in source control. The approach you want to take is to only store new Sitecore items (layouts, sublayouts, templates, etc) that you create along with any items you may need to customize. You do not need to store all of the sitecore source, content or modules...just what you would need to reapply to get a fresh environment up-to-date. You can manage this manually but a tool like TDS makes this MUCH easier.
We use TDS to manage the publish/deploy to each of our environments. TDS has configurable settings for handling items that have been deleted, including the ability to move it to the Sitecore recycle bin or simply remove it. You have to be careful with this but it does work.
We use a separate build environment to assemble and run deployments using TDS and Jenkins. Basically, all of the code is retrieved from the source control system to the Sitecore server and built using MSBuild and TDS. In most cases we use a webdeploy directly to the Sitecore webroot, but for production we build TDS packages and then run them on each Content Delivery Server
We have used this setup for 7 sitecore projects so far and I am very happy with how it has worked out. We have questioned whether TDS is worth the license fee but the answer always comes back as a yes. The alternative is not very appealing for our development staff and time savings far out-weigh the costs.
Everything is stored in Source Control!... just not always in the same area as they reside on the web server. Storing the Sitecore folder in source control is a good idea as there are changes that you will have as you install modules, but you do NOT add the Sitecore folder as part of your solution/project and should really be there to pull from if need be and not something that is even tracked/monitored.
Once Sitecore is installed, create a new project that resides in the website folder and only add things like the properties folder, layouts, xml and other folders that you want. I don't even include the app_config in my project. Oh and to be clear, it's probably best to just keep the Sitecore folder as a sort of reference folder in your source control but not as part of your website trunk. We have it on the ignore list for website folder in source control. However, that being said, keep in mind that you will NEED to have it in your website folder.
Technically speaking, the recommended approach is to install Sitecore on to the server itself as a stand alone empty instance.. like using the installer with the client mode (not full) so that you get the framework for an empty site in place. Then you can create the deployment package/packages/whatever and it will all be your own code. You should really never have to mess with changing/removing the base Sitecore file system manually.
See above. Generally speaking, unless you have a reason to do so: install Sitecore as an empty instance... then manage your code/files via deployment and just leave the Sitecore folder files alone. You will have very little reason to ever touch them or the Sitecore folder itself outside of an upgrade.
Adding Sitecore itself to source control should be avoided, since you won't be deploying Sitecore as part of your implementation. For modifications to Sitecore itself, you would need a way of handling those inside your implementation, but the config patch system and other mechanisms provide the means for this.
Redundant files in the web site folder will only be a real problem in your development environment. When publishing to a demo environment or to a live environment, you will only publish the material that you actually want. And the deployment-based setup opens up the possibility of always starting from a clean Sitecore installation - as long as you include your Sitecore modifications as part of your implementation (which is not covered in the video). So there is little risk of this being a problem in real life, and the development method in the video makes eliminating this risk entirely possible.
The Sitecore installation should be handled outside of the deployment of your implementation.
It's a good setup, because the method in the video is the method Sitecore recommends for development, and it is also the method Sitecore teaches to developers in development courses. The most obvious advantages of this method are
Clean separation between your web site implementation and the Sitecore installation. There is no risk of accidentally mangling the Sitecore installation, and there is no risk of forgetting unmanaged manual modifications to Sitecore that are needed to run your site. This separation is hard to accomplish if you're not using the method in the video.
By using publishing to deploy your implementation, you know that your implementation is deployable on top of a clean Sitecore installation - and works. This means when deploying to a production or demo server in the future, things will work the same and there will be no surprises. This is very hard to be confident about if you're not using the method in the video.
To test your implementation on a different version of Sitecore, you can just deploy to a clean installation of a different version. This is very hard to test if you're not using the method in the video.
There is sample source code for the video on GitHub, along with instructions on how to set up the development environment, including the publishing parts. This sample source directly and indirectly answers some of your questions.